why is always the same????

Not true hosen, the ONLY way I have won is technologically and culturally. I and I have done it many, many times culturally.

Well, hosen is not saying the only way to win is a military victory. What is being said is that unless you have a mighty military rating to back your empire up, you will be getting into wars unless you keep paying the aliens off. Therefore, the argument is that it undermines the other types of victory conditions if so much effort has to be focused on military strength. A slow build technologist wanting to win with the least bloodshed possible should not need a mighty armada if he wants to research in peace. If such an armada is necessary, the argument is suggesting why not just go for the throat anyway, since there is enough force to back it up?

My personal analysis of the situation is that one does need a significant early deterent until trade routes can be set up that help normalize relations. Unless one wants to either pay up or take to fighting. Otherwise, the alien battleships will come a knocking. My usual tactic is culture bombs, but there seems to always be a case where I need a quick dirty war once in a while to destroy half the alien's navy and take a planet or two to make my point. Once I do have that military advantage on the power graph and a trade route or two set up, I am not bothered. But if I let some alien fools build up battleships or dreads and I do not put some attack power on the board to counter it while establishing trade, they will try to shake me down.

I just won a game by actively reducing my military.
I couldn't have beaten the Altarians. They were friendly, but they declared war for, apparently, no reason. I went back to my save game of a few years before and tried to understand what happened: After a lot of tries, I got a message like "we're watching your military buildup" (that from a race whose military rating was skyrocketing as they built more overlords). So I decided, let's sell them all those AMMs for a few techs, and I managed to win by giving them some more military.

I also won a game without a powerful military. Compared to the Altarians and the Torians I was lacking in almost every category!

I won by Alliance win. What I had to do for it was beeing nice, not powerful. However, in another Game where I won by Alliance-Victory I noticed that beeing powerful helps a lot to get them Close...

Howeer, I don't think, that it shall be possible to win without military. The AI shall try to win and to do so, it should be forced to exploit the weeknesses of its enemies. Otherwise it would be too easy. You can always play on lower levels to win without beeing concerned about the AI to blow you away, if your' not powerful.

you have other forms of winning but if you are a civ that is moderate in military they exploit that too much and they dont care if i have 2,3,4 tradings routes with them.. they make war.
on a game i was the most powerfull...in the moment i pass to 3 place they started asking money...i said no......bam..war..and the comp didnt care i was allied with half galaxy..and it was imposible for them to win....thats erratic..i has no sense...fight 3v1 yust for the 500 they ask me...

On larger maps you can win the game without having
any military at all the entire game, at mashocistic
level.

So im guessing the neccesity of military isnt so cut
and dry.

Hosen, why didn't you just pay them?

Just like in real life though, having a strong military is a good idea. If you plan to win at all, you are probably going to have a strong economy. And throughout history, those cultures that had a strong economy but lacked a strong army were typically toast.

This happened much more in earlier history, but more recently, Kuwait being invaded by Iraq is a good example. Lots of income via oil.. no military to speak of, an obvious target for a nasty regime.

Being rich and being weaker *should* quite often make you a target. Otherwise it wouldn't be realistic imo.

'Walk quietly and carry a big stick'.


fleabitfox

yeah, that's one thing i like about galciv: it mirrors real life where just having a strong military but no economy to back it up will not necessarily win. i have been or seen a lot of empires that were attacked by a stronger (militarily) empire but counterattack and win because they had a better economy to win in the long run.
[Message Edited]
[Message Edited]

i didnt pay because in other games i played(lost the 3)
i pay.....and 5 turns they ask again...till, i run out of money..and on very small maps or small,if you said no....you have the comp army nocking on your door in no time..also in small maps a sistem is all if lose one you are half way gone(is that the correct term??)
on bigger maps i have to try ...but in small that issue with the military is all.
you have an army you have eny type of victory at hand..

I just won a game without having a military at all!

i am in the middle of a game where i had a military than the drengin. i paid the drengin off but was so angry that i sent loads of cash and tech to other strong empires so they would make war on the drengin. even some minor races so that their income from trade would get reduced. then i sent all the excess cash i had into destabilizing them. by the time i was done they had a lower military and economy than me.

I would like to add that the original post's premise of

"the only way to win is by having a big fleet that can take on any race"

definitely has a lot of merit, but I think that it should be altered somewhat, to:

"a big help for winning is by having a superior military, numerically or technologically"

In my latest game, which I won culturally once, and after reload, technologically, my early strategy (where it counts) was to go technological as quickly as possible. I was in a corner of the map, only 2 planets, small 5x5 universe.
I built a small number of ships, but everything geared towards defense. I won the game by never attacking any planet. When the Drengin attacked, I let them. They had dozens of corvettes that just broke their teeth on any one of my ships (battleaxes mostly). When the AI is losing ships on a 20-1 ratio or more, you're good.

Pretty soon after the Drengin had lost half their fleet to my losing one ship, I got them to agree to peace. After that, it was smooth sailing.

Why not use your money and tech to get em at war with each other before they demand it of you.

I used Tri-Strontium steel and aphrodesiac to get every empire at war with virtually every other except me. Then I just usually gave em gifts of a cheap outdated ship or two here and there and it shut em all up.

#13, What AI-IQ Level are you talking about? From normal on upwards I've no longer seen the AI making totally senseless attacks, where they'd lose their ships in a 20:1 ratio... On Sub-Normal they however really seemed to love doing so!

Bobo never expect to play 4x space game without ships to back him big mouth. Bobo win without fighting all others sometime, but just like in jungle where Bobo's family come from, you no defend yourself, you get big stick against head or spear in butt.
Bobo say not expect to be nicey nicey to everyone and get nicey in return unless have big stick. In jungle or in space, that way things work.

that are good tactics..the one you postes(all of you)i didnt think it like that, im quiet new...but my problem is that comp sometimes( alot)pop up a messege that said i dont like you , i will erase you(something like that). because im not strong enough and i have nothing in my inventory to convince them to not atack me.....and destabilizing if have to do it to many race cost to much.....if you a have a good army ....most of the problems are solved..and you can put your efort in other things.....

Hosen you are complaining that you almost always need a strong military. Well you realy need to be competeitve in all areas of the game nomatter what win you are shooting for. Try to do a cultural win w/o those nice culture techs, or a military win when your planets are defecting left and right.

The manual states that the computer AI can/will take on many different attitudes toward the player, so while many of your games (don't know how many you've played) may have turn into war games, others have proven that one can play a peaceful game and still win.

Are you too good? Perhaps you are a little evil? Perhaps the computer AI just have it in for "you"! hehe
In any case, it's pretty clear there are many ways to win, but, some may be more prominent than others.

Just keep playing, I'm sure eventually you can win a game without having to fight a galaxy war.

I wouldn't call a game where I never wage war a peaceful game, though. The trick is you want the others to be at war with someone else. Thus they'll be too busy fighting one another to cause you any trouble.

It's kind of funny, but I've been playing this game for a month or so now and I haven't yet tried building a transport. I almost never build warships other than for local system defense, either. As others have said, if you're appropriately diplomatic and sneaky, there are often ways to work around militaristic opponents...

Bobo say transports good for getting stinky people off planet when morale go down. Too many people: planet get stinky. How Copernicus keep morale good with allkind stinky people?

Bobo,

Tax em to death, that will lower the population. Best to do this before you have huge populatino problems. Otherwise get morale resource and mine that real good. Get those morale trade goods too, also of course planetary resources. I play at crippling and star democracy and most of my planets are close to 100%, without the very expensive morale improvements (VR center, etc). Your mileage may differ. Oh, and since I have a usually low population, i suppliment each with a maxed out starbase, which will usually close to double production. That and I go to war alot - all those transports of stinky people.